Nonparametric regression for cost-effectiveness analyses with observational data -- a tutorial
观察数据成本效果分析中的非参数回归:教程AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确讨论观察数据中的混杂调整及治疗对健康结局和成本的因果效应估计。
观察数据成本效果分析中的非参数回归:教程AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Healthcare decision-making often requires selecting among treatment options under budget constraints, particularly when one option is more effective but also more costly. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) provides a framework for evaluating whether the health benefits of a treatment justify its additional costs. A key component of CEA is the estimation of treatment effects on both health outcomes and costs, which becomes challenging when using observational data, due to potential confounding. While advanced causal inference methods exist for use in such circumstances, their adoption in CEAs remains limited, with many studies relying on overly simplistic methods such as linear regression or propensity score matching. We believe that this is mainly due to health economists being generally unfamiliar with superior methodology. In this paper, we address this gap by introducing cost-effectiveness researchers to modern nonparametric regression models, with a particular focus on Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (BART). We provide practical guidance on how to implement BART in CEAs, including code examples, and discuss its advantages in producing more robust and credible estimates from observational data.